w 


i\ 


l. 


i 

Iff ' 

s 


IMAGE  EV; 
TEST  TARGI 


I 


*4f 


^^ 


<^ 


/2 


^} 


M 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


^^1 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


i 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


1-  IB    12.2 

'■  '"  III— 


1.8 


U    III  1.6 


'hotogrdphic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


73  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


^  -A 


^ 


V> 


*^ 


o^ 


^^  .«i> 


f  ■■  -- 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  In 


i 

I 


'••, —  E— -*i<inj.«>i;^ttiJh..3^»ipa  ■fA.'iu* TSKS'JCT^f^'ciJi*^" 


'-*-''*w*»*««*(ii*ite< 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


i 


i 
' 


icroreproductions  /  Institut  canadien  de  microreproductions  historique* 


"**«««S«wSi»*' 


^■MBfc*  »ttfv^'m*  ■jMj  ■■*<B3ft^a-'^"r  •'*--'^~*'  - 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Nol 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


D 


Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommag^e 


D 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurde  et/ou  pellicul6e 


D 


Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


I      I    Coloured  maps/ 


Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couleur 


□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

□   Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


D 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relid  avec  d'autres  documents 


D 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  int^rieure 


D 


Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout^es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6X6  film^es. 


D 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl^mentaires; 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  filmd  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu6  ci-des 

10X  14X  18X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


iliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


I  the  best 

Btures  of  this 

unique, 

I  the 

ntly  change 

:ked  below. 


Bd/ 
icul6e 


jr 

je  or  blacl<)/ 
bleue  ou  noire) 

ions/ 
couleur 


ws  or  distortion 

I  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
itdrieure 

oration  may 

rer  possible,  these 

J/ 

ilanches  ajout^es 
tsent  dans  le  texte, 
8,  ces  pages  n'ont 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6X6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mdthode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquds  ci-dessous. 


D 
D 

n 


D 


Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag^es 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pellicul^es 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  ddcolor^es,  tachetdes  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtachdes 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


D 


[      I    Quality  of  print  varies/ 


Quality  indgale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materia!/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppldmentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelur**, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmdes  d  nouveau  de  fapon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


atio  checked  below/ 


ction 
18X 

man 

lue  c 

i-aes 

sous 
22X 

26X 

30X 

i 

■J 

X 

20X 

24X 

28X 

32X 

The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Library  of  Congress 
Photoduplication  Service 


The  Images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — »-  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  y  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc..  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

4 

5 

iluced  thanks 


nee 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grfice  k  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Library  of  Congress 
Pho^oduplicaticn  Service 


)st  quality 
id  legibility 
rith  the 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  dt6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  netteti  de  Texemplalre  fiim6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


rs  are  filmed 
nding  on 
ited  impres- 
riate.  All 
ining  on  the 
I  impres- 
:h  a  printed 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimie  sont  filmds  en  commengant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  sost  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soot  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernid'e  page  qui  comporte  une  teile 
empreinte. 


rofiche 
tig  "CON- 
j  "END"), 


Un  des  symb.  les  suivants  apparaitra  sut'  la 
dernidre  imago  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
synibole  V  signifLt  "FIN". 


med  at 
large  to  be 
filmed 
ler,  left  to 
mes  as 
Btrate  the 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
film^s  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6.  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  Tangle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
iltustrent  la  mdthode. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

'■•v^^a^it^^^Ut-tgi^ 


mttu-^Sinmi^iism 


Biftiit»t^:^tt!riifiA^iiiiA:i^^^ 


f;^ 


THE   yUESTION   OF  SIGN-lAN(UiAGE 


AND 


THE  UTHJTY  OF  SIGNS 


IN  THK   INSTRUCTION  OK  THK   DlUb' 


TWO  PAPERS 


.y 


BY 


ALEXANDEK  (JRAHAM  HELL. 


>J- 


Reprinted  bv  jjeniiissioii  from  //if  F.ducator. 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C.  : 

Sanders  Printing  Offick,  3414  Q  Strkbt. 

1898. 


«*»S£wS4»=iJ^''^^^^ 


r.? 


2 1  <);J4 


1 
I 


..  »   !■  It  I  wt  ■  "irwW'y*'^  ' 


1 


CONTENTS. 

I.    The  yrK.sTioN  of  Sion-1,anguagr     ...       pp.  5  to  9 

II.    The  Utility  OF  siON.s pp.  11(029 

Do  You  Use  Signs  iti  Your  School ' p.  1 1 

Why  Teachers  Cinuot  Amicably  Discuss  the 

Question  of  Signs p.  >3 

Action,  Clesture,  and  Signs p-  'S 

Utility  of  Action  and  Gesture p.  18 

The  Natural  Process  of  Learning  a  I<anguage  .        ,  p.  20 

Application  of  the  Natural  Process  to  the  Case  of  the  Deaf  .  j).  2 1 

Sign-Iyanguage p   24 

Conclusion  Defining  the  Author's  Attitude  Towards  the 

Different  Methods  of  Instrudling  the  Deaf     .  p.  28 


£-*v<.«««'-*w*e»*^e*^r^-«*»»«»jWJHMj^«3yri?r=S?BMJW*:sa»*»>~-"*-~»e;&*'Xi--^fcW>i"==**^^ 


I 


1 


THE  QUKSTION  OK  SI( JN-LAN( JUAdR. 

[I'Voiii  ///(•  luliiiator  Vol.  \',  pp.  ,\ — 4.] 

To  tfie  Etiifors  <./'  ///»•  Ent'CATOK  : 

You  hav(3  invitt'd  iu»i  to  iniik«<  a  f»'w  ri'nmrks 
coneerninj?  Mr.  Jenkins'  coniinnnication  ui>on  i\w 
"Question  of  Sijjns, "'  i»iblislie(l  in  the  P^i)r(;ATOU  Vol. 
IV,  ]»i).  21(5  -L'l'O;  and  also  to  oxpj-oss  my  own  views 
ui»ou  the  subject. 

In  your  editorial  notes  upon  the  •' Si<rn-Tjanj;i.a^e 
Defined, "  published  in  the  sann*  number  of  the  Enu- 
CATOii,  you  say,  and  very  truly  I  think  : 

"  Tliere   is  as  much  ilifTereiice  tx-'tween    'signs'   and  a 
'  sigii-laii|^iiaKc  '  as  t)etween  '  hricks,' and  a  '  l)riclt-liouse '." 

Now  it  seems  to  me  that  the  (juestion  raised  by 
Mr.  Jenkins  is  not  so  much  a  question  of  ''  Si^ns, "  as 
of  "  Si^n-Lanj?uaf?o  "  :  for  no  one  objects  to  the?  use  of 
the  ^(?stures  or  signs  emjjloyed  by  ordinary  hearing 
and  speaking  people,  when  used  in  the  same  way  that 
they  employ  them,  as  mere  accomi)animents  of  P^nglish 
words  ;  whereas  very  many  people  do  ol ,  .jt,  as  I  do, 
to  the  employment  of  signs  as  a  hnifftKuje  for  the  ex- 
pression of  ideas,  quite  indei)end<mtly  of  Englisli. 

Mr.  Jenkins,  however,  exjjresses  the  oi)inion  that 
the  De  I'Epee  sign-language  is  not  a  language  at  all, 
in  the  true  sense  of  that  term,  altliough  we  call  it  so, 
in  a  loo.se  c  -t  of  way,  ju.st  as  we  ,s)>eak  of  the  "lan- 
guage of  tl  )  stars,"  the  "language  of  flowers, "etc. 
For  exam])le  he  says  : 

"It  is  customary  among  us  to  spealt  of  the  'sign-lan- 
guage,' or  tlie  'language  of  signs,'  l)ut  language  is  that 
which  belong:;  to  the  tongue,  liiit^un  ;  it  is  the  utterance  of 
vocal  speech.  In  a  remote,  modified,  accommodated  sense, 
we  may  call  it  a  langu.-ge,  ju.st  p.s  we  speak  of  the  language 
of  flowers,  the  language  of  the  eyc^s,  the  language  of  stars, 
or  anv  other  non-oral  metho<l  of  communication." 


-.'i^*^Jz««*.^-^i*«^'i;«M»''"^^»**^  ^ 


=  r7S^T?*«>«3^r»-T>>t«et'?r'Tj^r; 


r-^^r-"«*MC?..?M"fi»TS»5Wi'V« 


K-.(.l«*;r.r.M:*r"->i" --cVw^MfcW^  » 


Mr,  Jenkins  is  certainly  in  error  in  thus  seeking 
to  limit  tlie  legitimate  use  of  the  word  "  language  "  to 
"the  utterance  of  vocal  speech"  alone,  for  reference 
to  the  dictionary  will  show  that  it  includes  "the  ex- 
pression of  ideas  by  writing,  or  any  other  instrumen- 
tality.  "—(Webster. ) 

As  we  can  express  ideas  through  the  instrumental- 
ity of  the  De  rEp6e  sign-language  alone,  without  re- 
course to  English,  we  are  justified,  I  think,  in  claiming, 
not  only  that  it  is  a  "language"  (in  the  correct  and 
proper  use  of  that  term — not  in  a  loose  sense)  but  that 
it  is  a  distinct  language— as  distinct  from  English  as 
French  or  German,  or  any  other  spoken  tongue.     Mr. 

Jenkins  says : 

"Thete  is  no  especial  objection  to  the  phrase  'sign- 
language,  '  unless  ^n  attempt  be  made  to  raise  it  to  the  dignity 
of  a  spoken  language,  and  thus  conceive  of  it  as  coming  into 
competition  with  the  National  speech,  which  its  proper, 
normal  use  never  permits  it  to  do." 

Tlie  fact  i.s  patent,  however,  and  has  never  been 
denied,  that  it  becomes  the  ordinary  and  usual  means 
of  communication— the  "vernacular"  so  to  speak-— of 
many  of  our  pupils,  so  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  does 
come  into  competition  with  the  National  speech,  what- 
ever "its  proper,  normal  use"  may  be.  Pupils 
certainly  are  not  sent  to  school  to  acquire  as  their 
vernacular,  a  language  not  understood  by  the  people 
among  whom  they  live.  That  such  a  language  should 
be  employed  as  a  means  of  communication  and  instruc- 
tion in  our  publi"!  schools  \r,  contrary  to  the  spirit  and 
practice  of  American  instituaons  (as  foreign  immi- 
grants have  found  out.)  In  my  opinion  necessity  alone 
could  justify  it ;  and  necessity  certainly  has  not  been 

shown. 

Mr.  Jenkins  says  that  even  if  we  admit  that  the 
De  I'Eiiee  sign-language  does  constitute  a  'language,  ' 
in  the  true  acceptation  of  that  term,  there  is  nothing 
at  all  improbable  in  children  "acquiring  two  lan- 
guages;"' and  he  claims  that  this  is  actually  done  in 
sign  schools ,  though  why  it  should  be  necessary  for 


i  \ 


V 


df^af    children  to  acquire   two   lan^ua^es   where  one 
alone  is  sufficient,  he  f'lils  to  state. 

When  I  receiviul  your  note  recjuestin^  me  to  write 
this  article,  I  was  under  the  impression  that  Mr. 
Jenkins'  paper  contained  some  argument  in  favor  of 
the  use  of  the  De  I'Epee  Lan^'Uiijje  of  Signs.  I  am 
surprised  therefore  to  tind,  uixm  careful  peiusal  of  his 
paper,  that  there  is  no  such  argument  there.  The  sum 
and  substance  of  what  he  s^ays  appears  to  me  to  be  as 
follows  : 

The  sign-language  is  not  a  language.  If  it  is, 
then  deaf  cliildren  can  learn  two  ;  and  they  do  in  sign- 
schools.  Poor  English  is  found'  in  oraJ,  as  well  as  in 
sign-schools. 

If  there  be  any  argument  here  in  favor  of  the 
sign-language,  it  must  surely  be  found  in  the  last 
point  named,  which  Mr.  Jenkins  considers  of  sufficient 
importance  to  be  termed  "the  vu.f  of  the  whole  ques- 
tion."'    He  says  : 

"  .\n  the  errors  peculiar  to  deaf-mutes,  in  schools  where 

si}i;ns  are  used,  are  found  in  the  compositions  of  pupils  taujjht 

under    the    oral    method.     This    is  the   uti.v  of    the   whole 

question." 

Of  course  lack  of  familiarity  with  the  English  lan- 
guage is,  of  itself,  a  sufficient  cause  for  poor  English  ; 
but  it  would  not  account  for  the  appearance  of  pecul- 
iarities of  expression  apparently  copying  the  idioms  of 
the  De  TEpee  language  of  signs.  If  by  "  errors  pecul- 
iar to  deaf-mutes  "  he  means  to  assert  that  peculiarities 
of  this  sort  are  to  be  found  in  the  compo.sitions  of  pu- 
pils taught  tinder  the  oral  method,  it  would  be  a  most 
interesting  circumstarce,  well  worthy  of  investigation, 
but  notj  I  think,  of  any  special  imi)ortance  in  connec- 
tion with  the  present  subject ;  because,  even  if  true,  it 
does  not  afford  a  reason  why  the  sign-language  should 
bo  emjiloyed  in  thc^  education  of  th(j  deaf.  The  utmost 
result  claimed,  even  by  Mr.  Jenkins,  is  as  follows  : 

"  If  this  can  be  proved  true,  then  the  constant  charge 
against  signs  i'.s  the  cause  «of  pigeon  Knglish  nnist  fall  to 
pieces." 


vsiiiSffiBess**^**'^*^^^''****'*""'™"'''"''  ^ 


It  will  thus  be  seen  that  in  the  eulminatin/?  part 
of  his  whole  arjfument  he  simply  seeks  to  claim  that 
the  sign-language  does  not  do  as  much  harm  as  is  com- 
monly supposed  ;  but  this  is  not  an  argument  showing 
that  any  advantage  arises  from  its  use. 

Mr.  Jenkins,  it  is  true,  expresses  the  opinion  that 
the  graduates  of  schools  that  employ  the  sign-language 
are  better  educated  than  those  of  oral  schools.  This 
of  course  would  be  an  argument  if  it  were  established 
by  facts  ;  but  Mr.  Jenkins  offers  no  evidence  in  its  sup- 
port. The  experience  of  the  Pennsylvania  Institution 
certainly  does  not  justify  his  conclusion.  It  is  well 
known  that  a  careful  comimrison  of  results  obtained  in 
the  Oral  and  Manual  Dei)artments  of  that  school  re- 
vealed the  fact  that  the  pujjils  of  the  Oral  Department, 
were  not  infex-ior  to  those  of  the  other  in  their  general 
education,  and  ability  to  use  written  English,  while 
they  were  superior  in  their  ability  to  use  and  under- 
stand speech. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  many  deaf  persons  have 
obtained  an  excellent  education  with  a  good  command 
of  English  without  recourse  to  the  De  I'Epee  Language 
of  Signs.  They  are  to  be  found  among  the  graduates 
of  Oral  Schools,  Manual  Alphabet  Schools  (like  the 
Rochester),  and  the  pupils  of  private  teachers. 

Helen  Keller  is  a  notable  case  in  point  with  which 
every  one  is  familiar  ;  and  I  may  also  cite  the  case  of 
Miss  Maud  Jones,  of  England,  (daughter  of  Sir  Will- 
oughby  Jones),  because  she  was  deaf  from  birth.  Her 
letters,  as  well  as  her  conversation,  show  that  she  has 
acquired  as  complete  a  mastery  of  the  English  lan- 
guage as  that  ijnssessed  by  any  hearing  person. 

If  then  a  good  education,  with  a  good  command  of 
the  English  language,  can  be  obtained  without  any  re- 
course to  the  De  I'Epoe  language  of  signs,  the  question 
naturally  arises,  what  need  is  there  for  the  latter  at 
all  ?    But  Mr.  Jenkins  does  not  touch  this  jjoint. 

In  conclusion  allow  me  to  say  that  if  it  is  not  nec- 
essary, it  is  obviously  not  advisable  that  deaf  children 


) 


'.^■ji 


ll 


0 

should  acquire,  and  use,  as  their  ordinary  and  hn.>>iti:!al 
nuuius  of  communi(!ation — their  vernacular  in  fact — a 
lanf,'uaKe  which  is  not  understood  by  the  i)eoi)le  among 
whom  they  live. 

I  have  a  great  deal  more  that  I  could  say  upon  this 
subject,  but  in  my  opinion  this  is  sufficient.  And  I 
feel  myself  placed  in  the  position  of  the  counsel  who 
was  called  ui)on  by  the  judge  to  show  cause  why  his 
client  had  not  appeared  in  court  when  summoned  to 
attend. 

"Please  your  Honor,"  said  he,  "I  have  twenty- 
one  reasons  to  present,  to  account  for  the  absence  of 
my  client  in  this  case. "  "  Let  us  hear  them, "  said  the 
judge.  "  Well,  in  the  first  place,  he  died  this  morning ; 
and—"  "Holdon,"saidthe  judge,  "that'll  do.  We'll 
waive  the  other  twenty  reasons,  "—and  dismissed  the 

case.* 

In  another  article  I  shall  be  glad  to  state  my  own 
views  concerning  "The  Utility  of  Signs,"  as  you  re- 
quest. 

Alexander  Graham  Belt.. 


*  The  late  Mr.  \V.  O.  Jenkins  replied  to  this  paper  in  an  article  en- 
titled •'  nr.  Bell's  Criticisms."    Seai/ie Ediualor,  Vol.  V,  pp.  77  to  79. 


..„-^;..^j* 


m.-^ 


UTILITY  OF  SIGNS. 

[I'Voiii  ///(■  I'.diiaUor  Vol.  V,  pj).  3S  to  4J.] 

To  tliv  Editofn  0/  The  EnrcATOH : 

It  gives  me  much  pleasure  to  respond  to  your  in- 
vitation to  address  your  readers  ui)on  the  subject  of 
"Signs."    You  say  : 

"Just  what  you  think  of  signs  and  their  utility,  or  lack 
of  utility,  is  not  generally  known.  1  do  not  know  that  you 
liave  ever  given  anything  that  would  be  considered  an 
authoritative  statement  of  your  position." 

It  is  with  some  diffidence,  I  must  confess,  that  I 
comply  with  your  request,  for  the  discussion  of  this 
subject  in  the  past,  as  you  liave  very  aptl^  remarked 
in  your  editorial  upon  "The  Sign-language  Defined," 

"has  been  for  the  most  part  profitless  and  unpro<luL^ive  of 
results  from  the  faa  that  terms  have  been  used  indiscrimi- 
nately and  without  an  agreed-upon  and  clearly  understotxl 
meaning."— (Hnuc.\TOR,  Vol.  IV,  p.  230.) 

The  nature  of  my  difficulty  will  be  best  understood 
from  an  example.  Allow  me  to  ask  the  reader  a 
(jiiestion  : 

DO   VOr    USE   SIONS   IN   YOrR   SCHOOL? 

Now,  suppose  you  say  "Yes,"  what  would  we  un- 
derstand you  to  mean  ?  Surely  that  the  De  I'Epi'e 
Sign-Language  is  employed  in  your  «chool.  But  sup- 
I)ose  you  say  "No,"  would  this  meaning  of  the  word 
be  retained  ?  I  am  afraid  not ;  and  the  result  would 
simply  be  that  your  veracity  would  be  open  to  ques- 
tion;  for  observation  of  your  school  work  would 
undoubtedly  show  that  you  use  natural  actions  to  illus- 
trate and  explain  the  meaning  of  English  expressions  ; 
and  expressive  gestures  to  emjjhasize  your  words,  and 
give  life,  and  force,  and  point  to  what  you  say. 


I 


12 

It  is  true  that  these  are  not  De  TEiH-e  sijyns— (by 
which  1  moan  the  conventional  ^'estures  employed  in 
the  De  I'Epee  languaKe  of  sij,ms)  but  are  they  not  natu- 
ral sij^ns  V     Even  thouj?h  you  should  claim  that  many 
natural  actions  are  not  sij?ns  at  all,  in  any  sense  of  the 
word  ;  and  that  expressive  gestures  are  not  signs  when 
used  as  accompaniments,  mwrely,  of  English  words; 
can  you  deny  that  natural  gestures  are  natural  signs, 
proDerly  so  called,  when  used  alone,  without  words  at 
all,  to  express  thoughtr-in  the  way  they  are  emjiloyed 
occasionally  by  hearing  poojile  ?    We  sometimes,  for 
example,  command  silence,  without  speaking  ourselves, 
by  placing  a  finger  on  the  lips.     We  sometimes  rebuke 
by  a  gesture  or  a  look  alone  ;  or  express  approval  oy  a 
nod,  or  a  pat  on  the  head,  without  words  at  all.     We 
som(?times  beckon  a  boy  to  come,  or  motion  him  away, 
without  speaking.     Every  teacher  admits  that  he  uses 
natural   signs  of  this  sort— at  least  occasionally— as 
hearing  pecjple  do.     But  can  you  deny  that  natural 
signs  are  signs  ?    If  not,  how  can  you  truthfully  say 
that  you  do  not  use  signs  in  your  school  ? 

Of  course  it  all  depends  upon  what  you  mean  by 
"signs."  If  you  mean  the  De  I'Epee  Language,  then 
they  are  not  signs  in  that  fieme,  any  more  than  the 
signs  of  the  Zodiac  are  signs,  for  they  do  not  consti- 
tute the  De  I'Epee  Language  of  Signs.  Indeed,  they 
are  called  "natural"  signs  for  the  very  purpose  of 
distinguishing  them  from  the  conventional  signs  char- 
acteristic of  the  De  I'Epee  Language. 

The  question  jiroposed  seems  a  very  simple  one  to 
a  sign  teacher,  for  he  can  say  "Yes  "  at  once,  and  no- 
body doubts  the  truth  of  his  assertion  :  but  to  those 
who  do  not  employ  the  De  I'Epee  language  of  signs  it 
is  a  veritable  "catch  question,"  comparable  to  the  old 
problem  of  toss-penny,  "  Heads,  I  win  ;  tails,  you  lose," 
—the  result  is  against  you  every  time !  If  you  say 
"Yes,"  you  are  apt  to  convey  a  meaning  that  you 
know  to  be  untrue  ;  and  if  you  say  "No,"  your  veracity 
is  equally  open  to  question. 


'  *^Sra*«b^^'«ri*«>» 


'• 


18 


WHY  TEACHERS  CANNOT  AMICABLY  DISCUSS  THE 
QUESTION  OF  SIGNS. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  this  is  the  reason  why  dis- 
cussions of  this  subject  in  the  past  have  usually  been 
more  productive  of  friction  between  the  disputants 
than  of  good  to  the  world.  Nobody  likes  to  have  his 
veracity  doubted — moK'  people  decidedly  resent  it — so 
that  pr  table  discussion  under  such  circumstances  is 
not  possible. 

Most  teachers  who  do  not  employ  the  De  rEi)6e 
Language  of  Signs,  are  quite  willing  to  admit  that 
they  employ  "natural  signs,"  at  least  occasionally ,  if 
by  that  term  you  mean  the  signs  employed  by  hearing 
people.  But  even  in  this  case  usage  differs.  Some 
teachers  understand  by  "  natural  signs  "  tha  signs  em- 
ployed by  uneducated  deaf  children  at  home  before 
they  come  to  school,  although  many  of  these  home- 
signs  are  just  as  truly  conventional  as  any  of  the  signs 
of  the  De  I'Ep^  Language.  This  is  why  some  teach- 
ers, in  their  desire  to  avoid  ambiguity,  declare  that 
they  use  "natural  gestures,"  not  "signs." 

So  long  as  the  word  "signs"  is  currently  em- 
ployed as  a  convenient  abbreviation  for  "De  VEp^e 
Sign  Language,"  so  long,  of  course,  will  many  of  those 
who  are  opposed  to  the  use  of  that  language  deny  that 
they  use  "signs  "  at  all.  Then  comes  unfriendly  criti- 
cism, and  the  charge  of  untruth  :  "  They  say  they  don't 
use  signs  and  they  do, ' '  (although  all  the  time  it  is  well 
understood  that  they  do  not  employ  the  De  I'Ep^a 
Language.)  Bitterness  of  heart  follows  as  a  natural 
consequence.  Ill-feeling  is  aroused  on  both  sides,  and 
no  good  comes  of  discussion.  Assertions  take  the 
place  of  arguments.  One  side  asserts  that  they  do  not 
use  signs ;  the  other  that  they  do ;  while  all  the  time 
the  definition  of  what  they  mean  by  "signs"  is  left 
in  abeyance. 

Now  it  is  a  curious  fact,  and,  under  the  circum- 
stances  perhaps   a    lamentable   one,    that   the  word 


■ii 


14 

"sipn"  is  used  in  very  many  different  senses  in  the 
English  languaKi^.  The  new  Centu-y  Dictionary  (a 
quarto)  devotes  no  less  than  a  whole  i)age  to  the  defl- 
niti'»n  of  the  meanings  of  that  one  word.  So  that  an 
unfriendly  critic,  unlimited  by  any  technical  meaning 
of  the  word,  is  able  to  And  "signs"  everywhere  m 
schools  that  do  not  employ  the  De  I'Ep/'e  Language. 

Once  you  depart  from  the  technical  meaning  of 
the  term  (whatever  that  may  be,)  there  is  no  end  to 
the  meanings  that  may  be  assigned  to  the  word  with 
some  show  of  plaup'bility.  If  you  use  finger  sijelling 
in  your  school,  are  not  the  movements  of  the  fingers  in 
forming  the  manual  alphabet  "signs"  for  the  letters 
of  the  alphabet?  If  you  are  an  oralist,  are  not  the 
movements  of  the  lips  "signs"  to  the  deaf  ?  (I  have 
known  the  veracity  of  honest  teachers  to  be  impugned 
on  just  such  grounds  as  these.)  You  cannot  frown,  or 
smile,  or  laugh,  or  stamp  your  foot,  but  the.se  are 
"signs. "  In  fact  you  cannot  do  anything  that  is  not  a 
sign!  For  you  cannot  do  anything  without  moving; 
and  are  not  actions  and  motions  and  gestures  of  all 
sorts  "signs"? 

But  an  unfriendly  critic  need  not  confine  himself 
to  motions  or  gestures.  He  can  prove,  if  he  chooses, 
that  every  picture  you  show  to  a  child  is  a  "sign," 
nay  more,  the  very  words  you  employ — whether 
spoken,  or  written,  or  spelled  upon  the  fingers — are 
"signs "  of  ideas.  In  fact,  anything  whatever  may  be 
a  "sign"! 

"This  shall  be  a  sifjn  unto  you.  Ye  shall  find  the  babe, 
wrapped  in  swaddling  clothes,  lying  in  a  manger." — (L,uke 
ii  :  12. ) 

Now  you  ask  me  what  I  think  of  "signs;" — their 

utility,  inutility,  etc.     Well  I  must  say  that  with  my 

knowledge  of  the  possible  latitude  in  the  meaning  of 

the  word,  and  with  the  experience  of  past  discussions 

of  this  subject  before  me,  I  think  we  can  not  profitably 

discuss  the  subject  of  "signs  "  at  all,  until  some  agree 

ment  has  been  reached  by  the  profession  as  to  the 

technical  meaning  to  be  assigned  to  the  term.     I  shall 


< 


15 

therefore,  with  your  leave,  speak  of  "Action"  and 
"Gesture"  instead;  because  these  words  have  a  tech- 
nical and  well  understood  meaning  in  Oratory  (to 
which  oral  work  properly  belongs ;)  whereas  the  tech- 
nical meaning  of  "signs"  has  never  been  authorita- 
tively defined.  I  must  leave  your  readers  to  decide 
for  themselves  how  far  the  actions  and  gestures  of 
which  I  approve  constitute  "signs"  in  the  sense  that 
word  is  employed  by  teachers  of  the  deaf. 

ACTION,  OESTUIIE,  AND  SIGNS. 

It  may  be  well  here  to  remark  that  ordinary  hear- 
ing people  do  not  consider  "  gestures  "  and  "signs  "  as 
synonymous  terms.  Although  in  our  technical  use  of 
the  word,  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that  all  signs  are 
gestures,  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  all  gest- 
ures are  signs.  All  potatoes  are  vegetables,  but  all 
vegetables  are  not  potatoes.  All  gestures  are  actions, 
but  all  actions  are  not  gestures.  Perhaps  it  may  be 
well  to  illustrate  : — 

A  number  of  years  ago  I  had  a  little  congenitally 
deaf  pupil,  only  five  years  of  age,  to  whom  I  taught 
the  English  language,  through  writing  and  a  manual 
alphabet.  I  preferred  writing  wherever  possible  ;  and 
we  carried  a  writing  pad  with  us  when  we  went  for  a 
walk,  so  that  I  could  write  to  him  about  the  various 
things  we  saw.  Indeed  I  preferred  this  method  of 
instruction  to  the  more  formal  processes  of  the  school 
room.  I  remember  that  upon  one  occasion,  while 
walking  along  a  country  road,  we  were  followed  by  a 
strange  dog.  I  saw,  by  the  wagging  of  his  tail,  that 
there  was  no  harm  in  him ;  but  my  little  pupil  was  in- 
clined to  be  suspicious  of  his  actions,  and  clung  to  me 
in  terror.  The  dog  sat  quietly  near  us  in  the  middle 
of  the  road,  while  I  wrote  something  about  him 
Uix)h  my  pad.  With  my  finger  on  my  lips,  and  in 'the 
most  mysterious  manner  possible,  I  showed  the  paper 
to  George — so  that  the  dog  should  not  see  it.  I  con- 
veyed the  idea,  by  my  actions,  that  this  was  a  great 


1« 


I 


socrot — intondod  for  G(H)rK<''s  oyc^  ulon«^ — which  the 
do^  iiitiHt  not  know.  In  a  morntnit  thw  littlo  follow 
forgot  his  fi'ivrs.  CurioMity  ^'ot  tlm  hotter  of  liiin.  H« 
wuH  intt>rnst»Ml ;  and,  with  a  knowing  wa^  of  his  lunid 
towards  tho  doj;,  and  with  a  happy  laugh,  lut  l(K)ked  at 
tho  pajM'r.  UiK)n  it  was  written  tho  H«*nt«mc«  "  Georgo, 
look  at  the  dog  running,"  I  thon  picked  uj)  a  stone 
and  threw  it  at  the  dog — and  he  was  off  like  a  shot ! 

This  natural  action — of  tho  dog's — interpreted  the 
meaning  of  tho  sontonco  I  had  written.  But  was  the 
dog-running -away  a  "sign"  or  even  a  "gesture?" 
My  natural  action  in  ])icking  up  tho  stone,  and  throw- 
ing it,  may  have  been  a  "gesture,"  but  was  it  a 
"slgnl*"  The  natural  actions  by  means  of  which  I 
conveyed  to  the  boy's  mind,  without  words,  the  idea 
that  what  I  was  going  to  show  him  was  a  secret,  were 
undoubtedly  natural  "signs"  as  well  as  "gestures." 

They  were  not  signs  in  the  sense  of  the  De  rEp<''o 
language  ;  but  they  were  signs  in  the  broader  sense  of 
gestures  of  some  sort  emi)loyed  in  i)laco  of  words  to 
express  ideas.  This  is  one  of  the  meanings  attached 
to  the  terra  by  ordinary  hearing  people  who  know 
nothing  about  the  deaf. 

"And  they  nuule  sIkiis  to  his  father  how  he  wouUl  have 
him  called." — (Luke  i :  62. ) 

This  implies  that  they  did  not  speak.  They  used 
gestures  instead  of  words. 

"Action"  and  "Gesture"  form  special  branches 
of  Oratory  ;  but  the  word  "Signs  "  is  not  understood 
in  this  sense  alone,  by  orators,  actors,  or  teachers  of 
elocution. 

Orators  do  not  understand  that  they  use  "signs  " 
when  they  gesticulate,  in  impassioned  delivery  befo'  v 
a  public  audience  ;  actors  do  not  know  the  word  in  the 
sense  of  "action  "  o"  the  stage  ;  and  teachers  of  elo- 
cution, though  "gesture"  forms  a  special  branch  of 
their  professional  work,  do  not  know  the  worf'  "signs  " 
as  an  equivalent. 


vrfafaaa:^  mma*^-* 


w 


4 

I 


I 


I- 


L 


I 

I 


» 


17 

I  say  this  from  personal  knowledge ;  for  long  be- 
fore I  became  an  instructor  of  the  deaf,  I  was  myself  a 
teacher  of  elocution,    as  my  father  was  before  me, 
and  my  grandfather  before  him.     I  have  taught  the 
piinciples  of  "Expressive  Gesture"  as  apart  of  my 
professional  worlc ,  to  elocutionary  pupils  both  hearing 
and  deaf.     In  teaching  a  deaf  boy  to  recil;e  a  dramatic 
poem,  for  instance,  I  would  of  course  teach  him  also  to 
use  natural  and  appropriate  gestures,  just  as  I  would 
a    hearing    boy  under  similar  circumstances.     If  you 
study     Elocution     you    must    study     "action"    and 
"gesture"  as  a  necessary  part  of  your  course.     An 
awl^ward  position  of  the  body,  ungraceful  movements 
of  the  limbs,  inappropriate  actions,  etc.,  detract  seri- 
ously from  the  effect  of  the  best  articulation.     On  the 
other  hand,  a  good  presence,  graceful  movements,  and 
appropriate  actions,  improve  the  elfect  of  poor  articu- 
lati(m. 

In  the  very  broadest  sense  in  which  hearing  per- 
sons employ  the  term,  the  word  "sign  "  has  the  mean- 
ing of  "symbol  "  or  "  token,"  not  "gesture." 

"Then  certain  of  the  Scribes  and  of  the  Pharisees 
answered  siiving,  Master,  we  would  see  a  Sign  ftoni  thee. 
But  he  answered  and  said  unto  tlieni,  an  evil  and  adulterous 
generation  seeketh  after  a  sign  ;  and  there  shall  no  sign  l-e 
,riven  to  it,  hut  the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonah.  I'or  as 
Jonah  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the  whale's  belly, 
so  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  three  days  and  three  nights  in 
the  heart  of  the  earth."— (Matthew  xii :  38,  39,  40). 

Other  examples  will  readily  occur  to  the  reader- 
such  as  "signs  of  the  times, "  "  signs  of  poverty,  '  etc. 
"The  evening  red,  and  the  morning  gray,  is  a  sure 
sign  of  a  very  fine  day. "  It  is  in  this  sense  ("symbol  " 
oi""t(jken")  that  words,  (whether  spoken,  written,  or 
spelled  upon  the  fingers)  are  signs  of  ideas  ;  and  that 
the  movements  of  the  fingers  in  forming  the  manual 
alphabet  are  signs  for  the  letters  of  the  alphabet ;  and 
that  frowning,  smiling,  laughing,  and  stamping  your 
foot  are  signs,     (signs  of  emotion  for  example). 


18 

In  this  sense  also  an  endless  variety  of  actions  and 
postures  may  be  sijrns  oven  though  they  simply  accom- 
pany words  instead  of  takin«?  their  place.  For  in- 
stance, they  may  constitute  si^'ns  of  pleasure,  affection, 
lov«',  approval,  dislike,  anpcr,  hatred,  etc.  But  it  will 
be  observed  that  in  ordinary  parlance  actions  or  gest- 
ures are  not  signs  at  all,  in  any  .sense  of  the  term  (any 
more  than  they  are  "symbols"  or  "tokens")  unless 
th<>y  mean  something  more  than  the  mere  motions 
themselves. 

They  must  be  signiftcant  gestures— gestures  that 
mean  something— gestures  that  are  employed  for  the 
expression  of  emotion  or  thought— in  order  to  be  signs 
at  all  in  my  opinion.  In  my  last  letter  to  the  Commit- 
tee on  Classification  of  Methods  of  Instructing  the 
Deaf,  I  offered  this  as  a  definition  of  "signs"*;  but 
it  was  not  accepted  by  the  Committee,  or  discussed  at 
all ;  and  the  Chainnan  thought  that  tiie  definition  of 
technical  tc^rms  did  not  properly  come  within  the  pro- 
vince of  the  Connnittee.  The  object  of  the  Conference 
of  Superintendents  and  Principals  in  appointing  the 
Committee  was  defeated  largely  through  the  inability 
of  the  Committee  to  agree  upon  the  meaning  of  "  Sign 
Language"  and  "Signs."  This  shows  the  necessity 
for  some  authoritative  definition ;  and  I  hope  that  the 
C<mvention  of  American  Instructors  of  the  Deaf  will 
take  the  matter  up,  and  settle  it  once  for  all. 

rriMTY   OB^    ACTION    AND   (IKSTrUE. 

I  think  that  natui-al  actions  and  gestures  are  of 
great  \itility  in  the  instruction  of  the  Deaf,  when  us(>d 
as  heiii-ing  ])eople  employ  them,  as  accomi)animents  of 
English  words,  to  emi)hasize  and  reinforce  their  mean- 
ing. They  are  u.sef  ul  to  illustrate  English  expressions, 
just  as  pictures  illustrate  the  text  of  a  book.  Th<>y 
give  life  and  force  to  the  utterances  of  thought.  Boolcs 
intended  for   very   little  children  must  be  copiously 

*  .litnals  1S93  Vol.  XXXVIII.  foot  of  pape  401. 


-"Vsmi 


i 

I 


18 

illustrated  or  they  will  fail  to  interest  at  all.  Lan- 
guage unaccompanied  by  natural  actions  and  expres- 
sive gestures,  is  like  a  book  witliout  pictures,  a  dry 
and  cold  thing  to  present  to  little  children  whether 
hearing  or  deaf. 

There  are  no  teachers  in  existence  who  do  not  use 
them,  and  use  them  freely.  For  example  :  I  have  seen 
one  of  the  gentle  women  of  our  Oral  Schools  teach  a 
deaf  baby  the  meaning  of  ' '  come. ' '  She  said  the  word, 
she  opened  wide  her  arms,  and  with  a  winning  smile 
enticed  the  child  to  come ;  and  when  he  came  she 
clasped  him  lovingly  in  her  arms  and  rewarded  him 
with  a  kiss.  Now  I  fancy  some  captious  critic  may 
exclaim  that  these  were  "signs, "  Perhaps  they  were 
—to  the  child.  I  do  not  know.  But  if  such  actions 
as  these  are  what  you  mean  by  "signs,"  they  were 
natural  signs— the  kind  of  signs  which  every  loving 
mother  uses  with  her  child.  But  did  not  the  child  get 
tlie  meaning  of  the  word  from  the  signs  ?  He  did,  and 
I  am  glad  of  it.  We  all  obtained  our  first  knowledge 
of  words  in  this  way.  I  say,  God  bless  the  gentle 
teachers  who  use  such  signs  as  these,  whether  they 
do,  or  do  not,  employ  the  De  I'Ep^e  language  of  signs. 

Then  again  all  teachers  permit  little  children  to 
play;  and  what  we  call  "play"  consists  largely  of 
imitative  actions,  which,  if  employed  without  words, 
would  be  called  pantomime— the  acting  out  of  imagi- 
nary incidents  in  a  realistic  way.  It  is  action,  action, 
action  all  the  time. 

Many  teachers  utilize  play  in  the  instruction  of 
the  deaf  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  the  meaning  of 
English  expressions  to  very  young  children.  I  think 
it  an  admirable  plan.  In  my  own  practice  I  have  used 
play  freely  for  this  purpose.* 

One  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  Froebel's 
Kindergarten  is  the  systematic  utilization  of  natural 

»See  Annals7\^2„  Vol.  XXVIII,  pp.  124—139.  "  Tpon  n  tnetliod 
of  teaching  language  to  a  very  young  congenitally  deaf  child."  Re- 
prints may  l)e  ohtaiued  through  the  Volta  Bureau. 


'20 

actions  and  gestures,  in  play,  for  the  instruction  of 
hearing  children.  We  need  a  system  of  kindergarten 
for  the  deaf,  specially  adapted  for  the  teaching  of  Ian 
guage ;  and  I  view  the  introduction  of  kindergarten 
methods  into  so  many  schools  for  the  deaf  with  great 
hope.     Progress  undoubtedly  lies  in  that  direction. 

The  best  way  to  arrive  at  such  a  system,  I  think, 
is  to  examine  very  carefully  the  i^rocess  by  which 
hearing  children  come  to  understand  their  vernacuhir, 
and  study  the  part  played  by  natural  actions  and  gest- 
ures in  that  process.  We  certainly  do  not  begin  by 
performing  natural  actions  before  a  hearing  baby,  and 
then  require  him  to  express  what  we  have  done  in 
English  words.  The  child  understands  the  language 
to  a  very  considerable  extent  before  his  first  independ- 
ent attempts  at  composition  are  made.  Comprehension 
comes  first,  composition  afterwards. 

THK  NATURAL  PROCESS  OF  LEARNING  A  LANOl'AGE. 

The  natural  process  of  learning  a  language  is  by 
imitation.  What  does  this  mean  ?  Consider  what  we 
do.  We  talk  to  the  hearing  baby  in  Engliwh  words — 
we  do  not  expect  him  to  talk  to  us.  The  language  we 
want  him  to  learn,  we  use  ourselves — constantly — in  his 
pi'esence.  But  does  he  at  first  understand  ..hat  we 
say  ?  No,  he  does  not.  How  then  does  he  come  to 
understand  ?  The  first  glimmering  conceptions  are 
aroused  by  concurrent  actions — which  he  observes  : 
natural  actions  interjiret  the  meaning.  "John,  go 
and  shut  the  door,"  and  baby  .sees  John  get  up  and 
shut  the  door.  You  talk  to  the  baby  about  what  is 
going  on.  He  sees  what  is  going  on,  and  this  inter- 
prets the  meaning.  Expressive  Gestures,  too,  are 
freely  used  to  give  emphasis  and  life  to  what  you  say. 
Little  by  little,  as  the  power  of  comprehension  in- 
creases, context  comes  into  play.  Words  known  inter- 
pret those  that  are  obscure,  by  context ;  and  many  new 
words  and  forms  of  expression  in  this  way  reveal  their 
meaning  to  the  child  quite  independently  of  actions  at 


'  UIJj,lJi;i,lUPiJi  I  II.  .iillJJtt 


;i 


' 


81 

all.  And  all  this  process  j?oes  on,  in  the  case  of  the 
hearing  child,  before  he  utters  /</.s  Jlrst  word. 

Phrases  and  idiomatic  exi)ression8  are  compre- 
hended as  wholes,  even  though  the  comjionent  words 
may  not  be  fully  understood ;  just  as  we  understand 
what  Mr.  Jenkins  meant  by  "the  vkjc  of  the  whole 
question."  But  how  many  of  us  know  what  "/(mj"" 
means  ? 

Just  think  what  a  multitude  of  words  and  phrases 
are  presented  to  the  ears  of  the  hearing  child  during 
the  first  two  years  of  his  life,  before  he  is  expected  to 
speak  at  all ;  and  then  consider  how  much  English  our 
pupils  flee  before  they  are  required  to  express  their 
thoughts  by  writing  or  speech.  Hero  is  the  true  "nux 
of  the  whole  question,''  to  borrow  Mr.  Jenkins'  ex- 
pression :  More  English,  less  signs;  and  don't  use  signs  in 
place  of  toords. 

Use  natural  actions,  and  natural  gestures,  just  as 
you  use  them  with  hearing  children — neither  less,  nor 
more,  nor  in  a  different  manner — and  you  should  get 
the  same  results. 

APPLICATION  OF  THE  NATURAL  PROCESS  TO  THE 
CASE  OF  THE  DEAF. 

If  we  follow  the  natural  process  we  should  begin 
by  talking  to  the  child  in  English  words  (spoken,  writ- 
ten, or  spelled  upon  the  fingers,  according  to  the 
method  we  prefer  to  employ) ;  and  we  should  be  careful 
to  use  complete  sentences — idiomatic  phrases  and  all 
— just  such  language,  in  fact,  as  we  would  have  em 
ployed  if  the  child  could  hear.  And  these  sentences 
should  be  given  rapidly,  with  natural  emphasis  and 
expression  and  action,  even  though  the  child  may  fail 
to  catch  each  individual  word. 

The  whole  is  more  important  than  the  parts.  Illit- 
erate hearing  children  and  adults  cannot  tell  how 
many  letters,  or  syllables,  or  words  proceed  from  the 
mouth  of  a  speaker.  It  is  sufficient  for  them  to  under- 
stand the  general  meaning.  A  phrase,  or  sentence,  is 
the  unit  of  language,  not  a  word. 


'fi 


\ 


Ill  teaching  Enfjlisli  to  a  hearing  baby  wo  don't 
begin  wilht'lcments— (f— i)— s— etc.,)— or  syllables,  or 
words ;  we  use  sentencos  as  wholes.  Not  sentences 
slowly  uttered,  word  by  word,  with  clear,  deliberate 
enunciation :— wo  utter  them  rapidly,  with  plenty  of 
life  and  action  as  accompaniment,  subordinating  details 
of  every  kind  to  the  effect  as  a  whole.  We  don't  oven 
stop  to  inciuire  whether  the  child  understands  what  we 
say.  Indeed,  mo  know  he  does  not  at  first ;  but  we 
talk  right  on,  just  the  same,  whether  he  does  or  not. 

We  don't  stop  to  philosophize  atout  the  a])parent 
us(dessness  of  our  employing  language  that  we  know 
is  beyimd  the  hearing  baby's  comin-^^hension  at  the 
time  wo  use  it ;  we  talk  right  on.  We  don't  stop  to 
speculate  how  or  by  what  process  the  child  is  to  ac- 
quire the  meaning  of  colloquial  phrases  and  idiomatic 
expressions.  We  simi)ly  use  them  ourselves  and  talk 
right  on.  Whatever  we  desire  to  say,  we  say,  quite 
irrespective  of  grammatical  constructions ;  and  leave 
the  n^st  to  nature  without  bothering  our  brains  about 
the  how  and  when  to  do  this  or  that. 

"  The  Centipede  was  puzzled  quite 
When  ToUiwij^  in  fun, 
Said  '  Pray  which  lej(  cotiies  after  which  ?' 
This  put  her  mind  in  such  a  pitch, 
She  lay  distracted  in  the  ditch 
Considering  how  to  run." 

Don't  let  US  be  deterred  by  imaginary  difficulties 
from  going  right  ahead,  and  presenting  to  the  eyes  of 
the  deaf  whatever  we  do  to  the  ears  of  the  hearing. 
The  language  we  employ  in  talking  to  a  hearing  baby 
in  arms  is  sur(>ly  not  too  difficult  to  be  presented  to 
the  very  youngest  child  in  our  schools.  The  fact  is  we 
are  altogether  too  learned  in  our  ways  of  teaching. 
Old  Dalgarno  was  just  right  when  he  said  that  in  the 
teaching  of  language  "a  prattling  nur.se  is  a  better 
tutrix  to  her  foster  child,  than  the  most  profoundly 
learned  doctor  in  the  University;"  and  that  "there 
might  be  successful  addresses  made  to  a  dumb  child. 


' 


): 


i 
t 


L'8 

even  in  his  cradle,  when  he  begins  riftu  vognoscore 
matreiii,  if  the  mother,  or  nurse,  had  but  as  nimble  a 
hand,  as  commonly  they  have  a  tongue. '  '* 

Natural  actions  and  gestures  should,  I  think,  be 
used  with  great  freedom  at  the  outset  of  education, 
in  conjunction  with  words ;  but  not  independently  of 
words  any  more  than  m  the  case  of  the  hearing  child. 
After  the  deaf  child  has  begun  to  recognize  sentences, 
and  comprehend  their  general  meaning  (even  though 
he  may  not  fully  understand  the  component  words), 
actions  and  gestures  should  be  used  more  sparingly  so 
as  to  force  him  to  apply  context  to  the  interpretation 
of  the  language  employed.  They  should  be  used  less 
and  less  as  his  education  advances,  so  as  to  force  him 
to  use  context  more  and  more,  and  thus  lead  him  grad- 
ually to  the  comprehension  of  English,  unaccompanied 
by  j,ction  at  all. 

It  should  be  our  constant  endeavor,  I  think,  to  use 
words  without  action,  and  avoid  action  without  words. 
Indeed,  as  a  general  rule,  I  think  it  would  advance  the 
deaf  child  more  in  his  knowledge  of  language,  to  ex- 
plain unknown  words  and  phrases  by  other  words  than 
to  illustrate  the  meaning  by  actions,  pictures,  or  even 
by  objects  themselves.  Express  the  same  thought  in 
other  terms.  Incorporate  the  unknown  term  in  a  new 
sentence.  In  a  word :  prefer  context  to  every  other 
method  of  explanation. 

I  believe  the  true  principle  is — to  treat  the  child 
as  though  he  could  hear.  Consider  what  you  would 
do  if  he  were  your  own  hearing  boy.  For  example  : 
"  Pai)a,  what  does  politeness  mean  ?"  Would  you  not 
at  once  attempt  to  explain  its  meaning  by  other  English 
words,  and  try  to  enable  him  to  get  it  by  context  ? 
' '  Why  you  know,  my  dear,  if  you  do  thus  and  so,  you 
would  be  very  rude  ;  but  if  you  do  so,  you  would  be 
very  polite."    You  would  probably  give  him  a  number 

*See  Didascalocophus,  published  1680;  reprinted  in  the  Annals 
for  1875,  Vol.  IX,  pages  14  to  64. 


M 

of  such  examples  ;  but,  unless  he  was  a  very  little  fel- 
low indeed,  you  would  never  dream  of  accompanying 
your  words  by  illustrative  actions.  If  he  were  a  nn're 
baby  you  would  of  course  use  natural  ai-.tions  at  once. 
For  example,  you  miKht  show  him  how  to  hand  a  book 
to  Mamma  "  very  ix)litely,"  etc.,— but  with  an  older 
child  you  would  use  words  alone. 

The  only  natural  defect  in  the  deaf  child  is  his  in- 
ability to  hear.  I  think,  therefore,  we  should  treat 
him  exactly  as  we  treat  the  hearing  child,  excepting 
in  matters  affecting  the  ear.  The  English  language  is 
addressed  to  the  ear  of  the  ordinary  child.  In  the 
case  of  the  deaf  it  must  be  addressed  to  the  eye,  (or 
some  other  sense  than  that  of  hearing).  This  is  all 
that  the  necessities  of  his  ca.so  recjuire.  There  need 
l>e  no  difference  in  the  matter  of  "Signs  ;"  and  I  think 
there  should  not ;  for  it  is  certainly  one  of  our  objects, 
as  instructors,  tt)  make  the  deaf  clsild  as  like  the  hear- 
ing child  as  the  necessities  of  his  case  admit. 

SKIN-I.ANOI'AOIO. 

In  the  Christmas  i)antomime  we  have  an  illustra- 
tion of  natiu-al  actions  and  natural  gestures  employed 
by  themselves  in  place  of  words  to  express  ideas. 
This  then  is  an  exhibition  of  natural  sign-language. 
We  all  enjoy  pantomimic  acting  wherever  we  see  it ; 
and  it  is  therefore  surely  a  strange  and  significant  fact 
that  pantomime  should  only  be  presented  to  the  public 
as  a  comic  show. 

I  would  not  use  natural  actions  and  natural  gest- 
ures in  this  way  in  the  instruction  of  the  deaf,  I 
don't  want  a  deaf  child  to  form  the  habit  of  expressing 
his  thoughts  by  pantomime  if  it  can  possibly  be 
helped.  I  wouldn't  like  my  hearing  child  to  do  it ; 
and  you  wouldn't  like  yours.  Why  not  V  Ask  that 
questit)n  of  your  heart ;  and  then  apply  the  answer  to 
the  case  of  the  deaf.  Whatever  your  reasons  may  be, 
they  are  my  reasons  for  not  desiring  it  in  the  case  of 
the  deaf  child. 


■■.g-;.,*:ar»icsi- 


). 


25 

I  moan  to  assort  that  not  ono  of  you  who  road  this 
])aiH'r  if  you  could  ])ossihly  avoid  it — wouhl  wuiit 
your  own  h(>annH'  child  to  uso  pantoniimo,  as  his  ordi- 
nary and  usual  nioans  of  communication,  in  placo  of 
Kn>,'lish,  though  all  tho  world  mijrht  bo  able  to  undor- 
sland  it.  What  thon  would  bo  your  attitudo  towards  a 
hin^ua^o  of  ])antoinimo  that  nobody  could  undorstand, 
savi,'  yoursolf  ami  a  fow  othors  i'  If,  throu^'h  i«rno- 
ranco  of  how  to  mana^^e  your  boy,  you  had  nofyhnrtod 
to  toach  liim  En^'lish,  so  that  ho  had  boon  forcod  to 
invont  a  crudo  lanjjfuajro  of  this  sort,  which  nobody 
(!ould  undorstand  savo  yoursolf  and  tho  fow  i)ooi)l(^  at 
home,  would  you  want  him  to  ''(itain  it  ?  Cortainly 
not.  You  would  want  him  to  ^«  t  rid  o*  it  just  as  soon 
as  you  knew  how,  and  substitute  Enjjlish.  Now  this 
i.s  tho  actual  condition  of  the  deaf  child  when  ho  tirst 
ontoi's  school,  and  the  actual  attitudo  of  tho  i)aronts 
towards  the  child.  Ho  is  sent  to  us  to  loarn  Enjrlish, 
n<jt  other  sijjns. 

And  what  is  our  attitude  towards  tho  homo-siiarns 
he  brinjjs  into  school  'i  Wo  all  a^roo  that  it  is  not  de- 
sirable to  retain  thom.  Wo  ;a;et  rid  of  them  as  soon  as 
wo  possibly  can,  by  substituting  for  them  either  Enjr- 
lish  words,  or  Do  TEpoo  Sijafns  (according?  to  tho 
method  wc!  employ.)  But  tho  De  I'Epce  Sif::n-lanf^uajfo 
is  a  languajye  of  pantomime  even  less  intelligible  to 
ordinary  people  than  tho  home  sign-languages  of  tho 
l)U])ils  ;  for  it  is  not  understood  by  tho  jjoople  at  homo, 
with  whom  the  children  come  into  tho  most  jjorsoiial 
and  intinuite  relations  ;  and  most  of  tho  reasons  that 
lead  us  to  discard  home-signs,  are  equally  ai)iilicablo, 
I  think,  to  the  Do  TEpee  signs  as  well. 

Some  of  tho  disadvantages  that  I  believe  to  attach 
to  tho  use  of  the  De  I'Eik'o  Sign-Language  have  boon 
touched  upon  incidentally  in  my  remarks  concerning 
Mr.  Jenkins'  pai)er,*  so  that  I  need  not  enlarge  upim 
them  here. 

*See   "The   Question   of  SJgn-Lanjj;uaj;e "   republished    in   this 
pamphlet,  pp.  5  to  9. 


'>i<('aaai'aig3iiiai[ii!r«tWi'ii'««'Q"^'*' 


2fl 

The  disadvantiijyos  iiro  many  and  obvious,  but  the 
advantaK^^s  aro  not  so  ck'ar  to  my  mind.  1  should  be 
very  ghid  if  some  of  my  pood  friends  among  the  sign- 
teachers  would  only  point  them  out  to  your  i ,  aders  ; 
for  I  am  sure  wo  aro  all  oi«m  to  conviction,  and  have 
the  welfare  and  happiness  of  deaf  children  much  more 
at  heart  than  the  way  in  which  they  are  taught. 

It  has  often  been  claimed  that  the  use  of  the  De 
I'Epte  language  stimulates  the  mind  ox  the  pupil  and 
arouses  his  dormant  faculties.  I  can  readily  see  that 
this  may  be  the  case  ;  but  I  do  not  see  why  this  is  not 
also  true  of  any  other  language  you  choose  to  employ. 
The  dwarfed  mental  condition  of  the  uneducated  deaf 
child  is  simply  due  to  lack  of  suitable  communication 
with  other  minds ;  ho  needs  a  language  of  greater 
capacity  to  exjjress  ideas  than  he  possesses  in  his  own 
home-signs.  The  De  I'EpC'e  language  has  greater 
cai)acity ;  but  English  has  greater  capacity  still.  I 
speak  from  personal  knowledge  here  ;  for  it  must  not 
be  supposed  that  I  am  entirely  ignorant  of  the  De 
rEp6e  language  of  signs,  having  studied  it  conscien- 
tiously for  over  a  year,  under  such  able  instructors  as 
William  Martin  Chamberlain,  Philo  Packard,  and 
others.  I  must  confess  I  do  not  see  why  we  should 
use  an  inferior  language,  when  we  have  English  right 
at  our  hands — and  must  teach  it  to  him  anyway,  first 
or  last.     Why  not  teach  it  first  as  last  ? 

It  has  been  claimed  that  the  De  I'Ep^e  language  is 
an  easier  language  to  learn  than  English.  This  may 
be  so,  but  is  that  a  suificient  reason  for  its  use  ?  Ital- 
ian is  probably  easier  than  English ;  but  that  is  no 
reason  why  we  should  make  Italian  the  vernacular  of 
an  American  child.  That  is  no  reason  why  we  should 
teach  him  English  by  means  of  Italian.  The  very 
ease  with  which  the  De  I'Epte  Sign-language  is  ac 
quired  affords  an  explanation  of  the  curious  fact  that 
it  often  usurps  the  place  of  English,  as  the  vernacular 
of  the  deaf  child,  in  spite  of  exclusion  from  the  school- 
room, and  against  the  wishes  of  the  teachers. 


The  remedy  however  is  in  our  own  hands.  The 
deaf  child  does  not  know  tlio  Do  I'Eiu'e  Si^n  lan^najre 
when  ho  enti>rs  school ;  he  acHiuirt's  it  tlit'n\  It  is 
true  that  ho  already  knows  and  uses  a  crude  form  of 
sij,'n-lan;i;ua^'o  invented  by  himself  and  his  fri»Muls  at 
home;  so  that  in  this  way  peculiar  sijrns.  of  home 
manufacture,  are  introduced  into  every  school.  This 
is  the  reason  why  pupils,  «?ven  in  oral  schools,  are 
sometimes  found  to  bo  usinj,'  si^ms  of  some  sort  amouf; 
themselves  on  the  playjjrround  and  elsewhen\  We 
are  not  resjjonsible  for  the  home-si^ns  that  appear  in 
our  schools  ;  but  we  are  responsible  for  the  Do  TEpi'-e 
signs  that  are  acquired  in  their  place.  The  blame,  if 
blame  there  be,  rests  on  our  shoulders  ;  and  we  cannot 
shuffle  off  the  responsibility  on  the  j^round  that  we  do 
not  "teach"  the  Do  I'Ep^'e  signs  in  our  schools,  but 
that  the  children  acquire  them  themselves — naturally 
— without  si)ecial  instruction  from  us.  The  fact  re- 
mains that  the  deaf  child  does  not  know  them  when 
he  enters  school,  but  acquires  them  there,  and  he 
would  not  acquire  them  if  he  did  not  see  them  used. 
The  remedy  then  is  in  our  own  hands  :  Don't  use  them 
at  all,  use  English  instead.  Give  him  pure  English 
instead  of  signs.  Teach  English  by  usage,  and  drop 
the  sign- language  from  our  schools. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  all  things  have  a  use ;  and 
there  may  even  be  a  use  for  the  De  I'Epee  language  of 
signs ;  but  I  do  not  think  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  in- 
struction of  the  young.  If  use  it  has  at  all,  it  lies,  I 
think,  in  the  possibility  of  employing  it  as  a  means  of 
reaching  and  benefiting  adults  who  are  unable  to  com- 
municate with  the  hearing  world.  But  this  field  of 
usefulness  lies  beyond  our  province  as  instructors  of 
the  young.  We  deal  with  children  alone.  The  adults 
referred  to  represent  our  failures.  Let  us  have  as  few 
of  them  as  we  possibly  can. 


■  »l»l— 


CONCIil'SION    DKKININd    TIIK    At    PriOli'S    ATTI'I'I  l)K 

TOWAUDS   'I'lIK    DIFFKUHNT    MK'l'HODS   OK 

INHTUrOTINC!     IIIK    I)I;AI'. 

You  Imv*'  iiskcd  iiic  for  "an  luillioritiitivt'  stiito- 
ment"  of  my  views  i-clatin^'  to  si>,'us  imd  the  (iiicstions 
involvod.  Y(ju  wish  iiin  in  fact  to  jduco  myself  "in  a 
fh'ar  uiul  uneijuivocal  jtositioii  "  so  tliut  all  may  uuder- 
staml  exactly  where  I  stand.  In  conclusion,  then,  I 
may  say  : 

I  believe  in  tlu»  use  of  natural  actions  and  natural 
gestures,  as  hearing'  people  employ  them,  not  in  any 
other  way.  I  helitjve  it  to  l)e  a  mistake  to  employ 
fj:estures  in  place  of  words  ;  and  natural  pantomime, 
or  8i^'n-lan^'ua<rti  of  any  sort,  should  not,  I  think,  bo 
used  as  a  means  of  (tonnuunication.  I  do  not  object  to 
immual  alphabets  of  any  kind  in  tlu*  earlier  stajjes  of 
instruction. 

I  i)refor  tho  j)ure  oral  method  to  aiiy  other  ,  but  I 
would  rather  have  a  deaf  child  tau^'ht  through  D« 
I'Epcci  sif^ns  than  not  educated  at  all.  1  think  there 
aiH»  two  classes  of  deaf  persons  who  should  certainly 
li((  taught  by  oral  nn'thods,  the  semi-deaf,  and  the 
semi-mute  ;  and  I  think  t  uit  all  the  semideuf  should 
receivci  the  benefits  ot  auri(!ular  instruction. 

In  ref^ard  to  the  othei-s  I  am  not  so  sure.  In  their 
case  I  am  not  an  advocate  exclusively  of  the  oral 
method  ahnie,  but  look  also  with  favor  upon  tho 
manual  alphabet  method  as  developed  in  the  Roch- 
ester school.  In  fact  I  advocate  pure  English  methods 
v.hatever  you  do ;  and  do  not  think  it  matters  very 
u)!ich  whether  you  be^in  with  written  lanj^uajre  and 
«>iid  with  speech  ;  or  begin  with  speech  and  end  with 
written  languaf?e ;  the  tinal  result,  I  think,  will  be 
substantially  the  same.  I  do  not  approve  of  contirn- 
ing  the  manual  alphabet  method  throughout  the  whole 
sclu)ol  life  of  the  pupil,  but  look  upon  it  only  us  a 
means  to  an  end.  The  oral  method  should,  I  think,  be 
used  in  the  higher  grades  ;  and  speech-reading  be  sub- 
stituted for  the  manual  alphabet  after  familiarity  with 


I 


f-^ 


^ 


i 


29 

the  English  language,  and  a  good  vocabulary,  have 
been  gained.  In  my  preference,  oral  methods  come 
first ;  the  manual  alphabet  method  second  ;  and  the 
sign-language  method  last ;  but  my  heart  is  with 
teachers  of  the  deaf  whatever  their  method  may  be. 

The  great  movement  now  going  on  in  sign  schools 
towards  the  greater  use  of  manually  spelled  English, 
and  the  less  use  of  signs,  meets  with  my  full  sympathy 
and  approval.  Those  schools  that  now  limit  the  use 
of  the  sign  language  to  chapel  exercises,  and  to  com- 
munication in  the  play  ground,  have,  in  my  opinion, 
made  a  step  in  the  right  direv'.tion.  My  attitude  to- 
wards them  is  Hamlet's  attitude  towards  the  players  : 
"Do  not  saw  the  air  too  much  with  your  hand — thus. 
•  •  •  •  I  pray  you  avoid  it. "  You  remember  what 
the  first  player  said  :  "I  hope  we  have  reformed  that 
indifferently  with  us."  To  which  Hamlet  replied, 
"O!  reform  it  altogether." 

In  regard  to  the  proper  use  of  action  and  gesture, 
I  cannot  do  better  than  give  you  Hamlet's  advice  to 
the  players — which  is  my  advice  to  you  all. 

"Suit  the  adtion  to  the  word,  and  the  word  to 
the  a<fUon,  with  this  special  observance,  that  you 
o'erdo  not  the  modesty  of  Nature." 

Alexander  Graham  Bell. 


-,.-'^— ■-?.  »-»»*^' 


„„-:-ife^rf,'«g«Wj»>ei-rii^,i!uASi%ii««'«i^^ 


tt 


-A  -  :;ii,i6A**iSrtftS*Wt*fciySSSft»^  i^S»g»fiSS»i6t^ 


fciR*»tif*riS9W»i!W^S=**^«'*«*'» 


J 


